Replies

...Now, let's shoot some wide holes into a theory that already has enormous truth gaps. The mandrake root, or Mandagora, does have an anaesthetic effect--but that's not all. Mandrake is also an emetic. It induces vomitting and diarrhea in improper doses, which can last for several hours. If Jesus ingested enough mandrake-vinegar solution to render him unconscious for six or seven hours, let's just say that people would have seen some rather unpleasant things.

There is also the serious risk of someone choking on their own vomit in an unconscious state. This is especially relevant because the Jews, like many other cultures, buried their dead lying face up. Jesus was prepared, wrapped, and put into the tomb within the course of a few hours. Of course, this is all assuming that the unusually large dose that produced instant unconsciousness wasn't lethal, as mandrake can be.

To spend this much time pointing out the flaws in mandrake-induced swoon theory is kind of silly. For one, you have to ignore John's record of a spear being thrust into Jesus's side, directly under the heart, producing an outflow of water and blood.

Second, the swoon theorist has to overlook the fact that Scripture has Jesus arrested on Thursday night, probably between 9 and 11 p.m. From the time he was arrested in Gethsemane to the time of his death, there is no record of him eating or drinking, other than the vinegar soaked sponge. To put it clearly, Jesus would have gone without food or water for approximately 16-18 hours. Not that big of a deal. The body's ability to maintain homeostasis is phenomenal, but that is overlooking the events that occured in those 16 to 18 hours...

I believe that the events as compiled in the Bible are as accurate as they can be, given the many translations and revisions, so when I hear someone presenting "theories" about the death and resurrection of Jesus, I have to say that that person or group of people, is trying to fill up the time with something that sounds "good" so he can feel justified in his "research."

The truth may be just barely there, and they may present it, at the beginning, but by the time the film is finished, it is unrecognizable as "truth."

Usually, when people were crucified, the position they were hanging in caused pressure on their disphram, which in turn, caused them to suffocate.

...If you've made it to this point, keep reading. You've seen The Passion of the Christ, right? It is accurate in portraying the kind of physical torture and suffering that would have been inflicted on Jesus. What most people remember is all the blood. Funny thing: I mentioned the fact of dehydration earlier. The body loses 1,450 to 2,800 mL of water each day for bodily processes, but it only requires one pint to maintain the bare minimum on a relatively short-term basis.

What that calculation doesn't take into consideration is massive blood loss, not only from the standpoint of its effect on dehydration, but blood pressure, electrolyte balance, and the like. The physical abuse, such as repeated beating didn't help, either. One thing that many who would defend the real suffering and death of Jesus seem to miss is sweat.

Jerusalem this time of year is usually warm. Not hot, mind you, but between 65 and 85 degrees in the daytime. Any labor, such as carrying a cross--or hanging on it, would have probably produced additional excretion in sweat, even on a late morning in the 70s.

Yet another thing to take into consideration is the fact that the Romans were executioners, par excellence. They had squads assigned solely for the purpose of making sure that the bodies hung on the makeshift crosses were dead. John's account is an example of that. The point of crucifixion was not to inflict the most pain and suffering on a victim, but to make them a spectacle and a warning to the people: don't mess with the Roman Empire or this will be you!

To suggest that Jesus was not dead yet taken off the cross is to ignore what was a common practice by the Romans. If St. John just made the incident with the spear up, but somehow retained the facts everything pertaining to the crucifixion prior to that, in some crazy Damocletian way to show that Jesus was truly dead, then how do you explain everything else?